MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2186059360

From Nomads to Settlers: Scenario analysis as a guide for first home owners in renting versus buying a home in Perth, Western Australia.

2010· article· en· W2186059360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J-Han Ho, Steven Rowley, Greg Costello

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing Market and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRentingPurchasingMetropolitan areaQuarter (Canadian coin)BusinessEconomicsEconomic rentFinanceDemographic economicsAdvertisingMarketingGeographyEngineeringMicroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of nationwide First Home Owner Grant (FHOG) purchases was 54,924; in the June quarter of 2009, an increase of 94.3% over the year (REIA 2009). This paper outlines an analysis tool which compares the financial outcomes for households who are contemplating the tenure choice of renting versus buying their first home in the Perth metropolitan region with the FHOG. The model employs the user cost of capital theory to develop a model that calculates the relative cost of renting and buying for a variety of house types under a number of market growth scenarios.. The results indicate that purchasing a median priced house has an immediate net financial benefit when compared to renting a house at the median rent if the annual growth rate for the property is ≥2.95% .This model can be used by prospective purchases to aid the decision to rent or purchase using either pre-determined scenarios based on historic variable rates or employing user generated assumptions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHousing Market and Economics→French-language works237,207→